Herman Baryohai Benjamin v Raymond Ephraim Benjamin & Anor
[2024] EWHC 215 (Ch)
Freddie Freed & Anor v Saffron Management Limited & Ors
28 July 2023
[2023] EWHC 1919 (Ch)
High Court
A family trust dispute went to court. The people suing were late in serving papers, and the judge was annoyed, but didn't throw the case out completely. They were told to fix their mistakes and pay costs for the delay. The judge said only some of the people needed to stay in the case.
Key Facts
- •Freddie and Minnie Freed (Claimants) are beneficiaries of the Fennel Trust.
- •Saffron Management Limited is the Trustee, Monika Freed (Second Defendant) is the Settlor.
- •Claimants allege serious breaches of trust by the Trustee and Settlor, excluding them as beneficiaries and replacing them with Monika's family.
- •The Claimants failed to serve the Amended Claim Form on the Replacement Beneficiaries (Third to Sixth Defendants) within the six-month time limit.
- •The First Defendant applied to strike out the claim due to the Claimants' abuse of process.
- •The Claimants applied for permission to serve their Notice of Discontinuance out of the jurisdiction.
- •The main assets of the trust are shares in F&M Investments (Holdings) Limited.
Legal Principles
Strict time limits for service of claim forms under CPR rule 7.5, and limited exceptions for extensions under CPR rule 7.6.
CPR rules 7.5 and 7.6, Aktas v Adepta [2011] QB 894
Definition of a 'necessary party' in the context of trust proceedings.
CPR rules 19.10 and 64.4, case law
Inherent jurisdiction of the court to replace trustees, even where the trust deed provides for a settlor's power of appointment.
Case law (Re C Foundation [2011] JRC 231 cited)
Abuse of process, including 'warehousing' of claims.
Asturion Foundation v Alibrahim 1 WLR 2767, Havering London Borough Council v Persons Unknown [2021] 4 WLR 135, Morgan Sindall Construction and Infrastructure Ltd v Capita Property and Infrastructure (Structures) Ltd [2023] EWHC 166 (TCC)
Rules governing discontinuance of claims, including obtaining court permission where interim injunctions are in place.
CPR rule 38.2
Permission to serve documents out of the jurisdiction.
CPR rules 6.37(5)(b)(ii) and 6.28(1)
Outcomes
The application to strike out the claim was refused.
The Claimants' failure to serve the claim form was due to mistake rather than deliberate abuse of process, although their conduct was criticised. The court found the Replacement Beneficiaries were not necessary parties but the Settlor was, to the extent the claim sought to replace the trustee.
Permission was granted to serve the Notice of Discontinuance on the Third to Sixth Defendants out of the jurisdiction.
Subject to the Claimants amending their claim to remove the challenge to the Settlor's right to appoint a new trustee.
Claimants must amend their claim to avoid challenging the Settlor's right to appoint a new trustee without her participation.
The Settlor is a necessary party to this aspect of the claim.
Costs order against Claimants.
To reflect their failures in serving the notice of claim and causing the delay.